| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: running make check with only specified tests |
| Date: | 2014-01-26 19:59:03 |
| Message-ID: | 16259.1390766343@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 01/26/2014 12:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Also, the tests themselves don't take that long, especially in parallel
>> mode. If you need to speed up repeated testing, it's more profitable to
>> avoid the install/initdb overhead of a "make check". I use a small
>> script that just reinstalls the postgres executable and does "make
>> installcheck-parallel" when I'm doing iterative development.
> I have something similar, and prodded by your email I've just improved
> it a bit ;-) But it doesn't work so well if you're changing the catalog,
> as you need an initdb anyway.
True. OTOH, when you're changing the catalogs it seems pretty foolish
to not run the whole test suite.
Anyway, I have no great objection to the proposed patch, I'm just dubious
that it's really worth the trouble. If you do go through with it, I'd
suggest adding an installcheck-with variant.
In the bikeshedding department, maybe "-tests" instead of "-with"?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-01-26 20:14:03 | Re: [patch] Client-only installation on Windows |
| Previous Message | Marti Raudsepp | 2014-01-26 19:03:55 | Re: PoC: Partial sort |